What's a bigger mismatch: Alexander Povetkin vs Anthony Joshua or Alexander Povetkin vs David Price?

I just find it ridiculous that someone of David Price's size, is meant to be facing a mismatch against a relative 'midget' (in relative terms) as Alexander Povetkin. But Povetkin vs Joshua is not meant to be a mismatch, when Povetkin is much smaller and Joshua is much bigger, stronger and more powerful.

 

This is David Price and Tyson Fury together

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DP-GL26XcAAuD_H.jpg

Tyson Fury is listed to be 6 foot 9. And David Price looks taller. Ergo, he is very close to being 7 feett tall, if not exactly 7 feet or more.

Alexander Povetkin is slightly taller than 6 foot 1 inches.

My point is, how exactly is Povetkin vs Price such a big mismatch whilst Povetkin vs Joshua isn't? When Joshua is significantly faster, more muscular, younger and stronger than Povetkin? And especially considering how easily Joshua beat Wladimir Klitschko, compared to Povetkin being manhandled by the same Wladimir Klitschko?

Isn't this as cruel as human torture, putting someone as small and weak as Povetkin in the ring against a giant and a monstrous creature in Anthony Joshua? It seems similar to putting a mouse against a bear in a fight to death inside a Colosseum, where Joshua is the bear and Povetkin is the mouse.

 

Why do you think Povetkin is more skilled than Joshua?

 

Nope! In heavyweight boxing, size, physical strength, big muscles, punching power, reach and height are more important than skills. Skills are overrated!

Deontay Wilder is on the verge of becoming an all time great with very limited skills, in comparison to the smaller and more skilled heavyweights who are nowhere near as successful.

 

When I asked, I wasn't really disagreeing. Just asked out of curiosity. Glad to know!

And Joshua does get hit less though. So defensively, he is better but how much of it is down to his raw, physical size and strength and how much of it is it down to pure skills that are unrelated to having a big size and strength advantage is the question.

 

That's what I used to believe before. But as time has passed, I've had to learn to accept that in the heavyweight division, the most important attributes are size (natural weight), punching power, physical strength and range (height and reach). Boxing skills come next in the order of importance!

I think you'll agree that Alexander Povetkin and Eddie Chambers are far superior in terms of pure boxing skills compared to big super heavyweights like Anthony Joshua, Deontay Wilder and Tyson Fury? However, in head to head match ups, they will almost always be the underdog.

Povetkin is an exception because although he is small, he has punching power. Thus, for a small heavyweight, being skill + powerful (Alexander Povetkin) > being skillful + not very powerful (Eddie Chambers).

If a heavyweight is bigger and more powerful than most of his opponents. Than he doesn't need to be too skilled. He only needs to do one or two things well in order to succeed. Deontay Wilder being a primary example for that.

If a heavyweight is bigger than most of his opponents but isn't very powerful (like Tyson Fury and Nikolai Valuev). He also wouldn't need to be supremely skilled. He would just need to do a few things well and that's it.

If a small skilled heavyweight with good punching power (someone like Povetkin or Mike Tyson) faces a big skilled heavyweight that also possesses punching power (like Anthony Joshua). Then the bigger skilled heavyweight has to be favored and it may even be a mismatch.